Very interesting interview w/ Wayne Allyn Root

[emazur]

As you may know, Root is running for Libertarian National Chair and recently had to answer to some hard hitting questions. Many here are skeptics but I like Root, but I thought this particular answer would be of interest to people here:
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/04/root-answers-moulton/

3. Some have described you as the Sarah Palin of the LP in that you are great at delivering talking points, but when conversations get more substantive you sometimes do not have the deeper insights that come from scholarly study of issues (in stark contrast to Ron Paul, for example). As valedictorian of your high school class and an ivy league graduate, clearly you have the capacity to learn and convey such information. If elected Chair, will you correct this deficiency by getting in depth briefings from Cato scholars on issues of the day and teach yourself the principles and applications of free-market (Austrian) economics by studying Mises, Hayek, and Rothbard?

I’m not exactly ignorant in the subject of political philosophy. I graduated with honors at Columbia University with a degree in Political Science.

I’ve read Murray Rothbard’s For a New Liberty. I understand from Von Mises and Hayek how manipulation of the credit markets causes a boom-bust cycle. I’ve read the Cato Handbook from front to back. I’m actually a policy wonk who studies every political poll in the country so I can gain an understanding of where the electorate stands and how the LP can position ourselves to capitalize.

I understand the desire of some of us to want to put forward the intellectual arguments for a free society. Unfortunately very few voters know, understand or care about any of the LP’s principled or intellectual stands. If they did, we would have made a lot more progress during the last 39 years.

We are far too intellectual in our approach for the average voter, who is too busy earning a living, raising kids, and trying to pay the mortgage to care. Just because we Libertarians have spent more time pondering issues does not mean the average voter will.

I aim to simplify it all in a positive, pragmatic way to get their attention and support. There is very little difference between what I believe and what my opponents for National Chair believe. But what’s different is style. I don’t scare away voters with radical or extreme language. I try to find common ground and build consensus. I make friends with my viewers and listeners. I try to show them as much of the libertarian philosophy as they’re able to see.

I don’t dismiss those who debate with me as being fools, but try to have a reasoned discussion with them.

I believe you first have to make someone comfortable with you before they will listen.

I’m interested in how to better communicate with the public, so that they will adopt our ideas. We will get more people to adopt our views by studying the communication techniques of Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan, rather than the writings of Lysander Spooner.

I know how to successfully reach and communicate with members of the American public. My bigger struggle is communicating with members of my own party the fact that in this country, at this time, style is the key to selling substance. The question you have to ask yourself when voting for a chairman is which group would you rather he or she be successful at addressing- those who are already with us, or those who have yet to join us? The choice for LP Chair is clear- I am the LP Chairman that stands for expanding our base and spreading freedom and liberty to tens of millions of voters who may not know they are Libertarians- yet. I want to make the tent bigger- with room for all of America’s freedom-lovers. Only then will freedom reign.

[BuddyRey]

That is a pretty solid interview!

My take on Wayne Allen Root is this; there'll always a place in the libertarian movement for "popularizers" as well as intellectuals. Drew Carey, John Stossel, and Harry Browne have probably converted a lot more people to liberty than Mises, Rothbard, or Hayek have.

The problem I have with Root isn't that he's a popularizer of libertarianism, but that he often seems more concerned with popularizing himself. That always sends up a red flag in my mind, and I'm sure it does others too, because most people intuitively know when somebody's trying to sell them something.

Mary Ruwart and Michael Cloud are pretty good at mainstreaming libertarianism and distilling the ideas for a Reader's Digest audience too, but they never let their listeners' focus escape from the ideas themselves. This is an area in which I think Root could use some practice. If he got the ideas down pat and maybe spent a bit more time familiarizing himself with the egghead side of things, he'd be an absolute double-threat.

[nayjevin]

The question you have to ask yourself when voting for a chairman is which group would you rather he or she be successful at addressing- those who are already with us, or those who have yet to join us?

Ha, I like that. Good read.

[TCE]

Ha, I like that. Good read.

Which is a huge problem with the LP. They make our infighting look like child's play. Essentially, the LP runs on the party rather than individuals. When I vote LP, I am voting for the party, not the candidate, which is not a way to get elected.

[Kotin]

He might actually be good for this position.. I know he comes off like a used car salesman but I am willing to give him a chance.

[TCE]

He might actually be good for this position.. I know he comes off like a used car salesman but I am willing to give him a chance.

Same here. What harm could he do, make sure the LP's candidates consistently get 1 and 2% in elections?

[nayjevin]

Same here. What harm could he do, make sure the LP's candidates consistently get 1 and 2% in elections?

They won't ever again, IMO. Something will bring the major '3rd' parties together soon. If it's in that party, it will be stronger than ever.

Straight libertarian ideas get way more than 2%. Constitution and rule of law wins in a landslide, if communicated properly, counted fairly, and undiluted. The entire country is moving in the direction of both.

[WorldonaString]

Besides the carsalesman vibe, he really messed up when the Ron Paul division had Dr. Mary Ruwart going toe to toe with Bob Barr in the final convention vote. WAR's descision to throw is delegates behind Barr was the game changer. He was not with the Paulistas then and I don't think he will be with us in the future.

[Sentient Void]

I think WAR is wrong, here - and I don't trust him, nor do I feel he's good for the LP movement (I also agree with what was said above that he seems to be more in it for himself). Ron Paul is much more intellectual and scholarly in the way he conveys, debates & delivers libertarian ideas, while also finding ways to popularize them. WAR says the LP hasn't come a long way in 39 years, which is true - but I don't think that is an issue with the platform as he claims, as much as it is with the system and the LP in general.

After all, I'd say RP converted more people to libertarian philosophy and thought in the last 3-4 years than the LP has in the last 40!

I know that I, and *MANY* others, especially other young adults have never even really known such a deep, profound and consistent policy even existed before RP's run for president.

I think RP's approach is solid. He gets it into the mainstream, even proposing what some would view as 'radical' ideas, is intellectual and scholarly about it, informed, etc... this gets people VERY interested - and then they can go deeper if they want by hearing/finding out about Rothbard, Ruwart, et al, and reading further to really educate themselves.

[nayjevin]

Ron Paul is much more intellectual and scholarly in the way he conveys, debates & delivers libertarian ideas, while also finding ways to popularize them....

After all, I'd say RP converted more people to libertarian philosophy and thought in the last 3-4 years than the LP has in the last 40!

I know that I, and *MANY* others, especially other young adults have never even really known such a deep, profound and consistent policy even existed before RP's run for president.

I think RP's approach is solid. He gets it into the mainstream, even proposing what some would view as 'radical' ideas, is intellectual and scholarly about it, informed, etc... this gets people VERY interested - and then they can go deeper if they want by hearing/finding out about Rothbard, Ruwart, et al, and reading further to really educate themselves.

I certainly agree with all this.

I haven't even seen WAR speak or know much about him, I just read the OP.

[Agorism]

The libertarian party has become to republican light. They need to be more of an anarchist party.

[EN81]

The libertarian party has become to republican light. They need to be more of an anarchist party.

Couldn't disagree more. It should appeal to more than the minuscule fringe elements, to gain broader support. If it doesn't position itself better, it will never amount to anything. I fully support reform in a more moderate libertarian direction.

[Dreamofunity]

"The majority of people are dumb, and we need to cater to this. Dumb down the message, compromise, and we'll succeed - as something we're not. Oh, and I can get you a good deal on a used Honda Civic, limited warranty, 0% financing for 12 months. Call me." - W.A.R.

[TCE]

The LP isn't supposed to be the party of Ron Paul. It has existed for a while, it doesn't need to piggyback off Dr. Paul. It needs to preach the following:

To the liberals: Cutting wasteful spending, civil liberties, end the war on drugs, truly anti-war.

To the conservatives: Cutting government heavily, getting the government out of private enterprise, the state solution to abortion, pro-Gun.

If it can do that, it will have way over 2 percent.

Dream: Root is correct. People don't want to sit around and have you explain Austrian Economics to them, they want a one-minute or 30-second pitch.

My example with health care: After a few years, everything goes down. iPods did, cell phones did, cars even do, but why doesn't health care? The answer is because the government drives up prices in health care, but doesn't have a say in the iPod business.

It works a lot better than the 10-minute pitch.

[nayjevin]

http://www.google.com/search?&q=video+curb+your+enthusiasm+car+salesman

[gls]

He may have some good points but IMO he is not the man to lead the charge. This was on his website as of December 2006:


HOW THE GOP CAN GET IT'S GROOVE BACK WITH THE DREAM TICKET OF McCAIN-LIEBERMAN IN 2008!

As the author of the #1 Amazon Best-Seller "Millionaire Republican," I have a vested interest in seeing my beloved GOP back in power. To that end, you can't blame this loyal Republican and former Malibu, California resident for doing some California Dreamin'. And what a dream it is! I've come up with a simple and easy 2-step plan that would instantly return the United States Senate to GOP control (today- without an election), energize the GOP base, and put a Republican in strong position to reclaim the White House in 2008 (giving us a great opportunity to control the Presidency for 20 consecutive years). My plan? It all revolves around a conservative Democrat named Joseph Lieberman!

Root also contributed $1000 to Lieberman's 2006 campaign: http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?26020893465

More information here:

http://knappster.blogspot.com/2008/04/those-who-try-to-rewrite-history.html

[Schiff_FTW]

.....

[Old Ducker]

The only value of the LP is as an educational tool to broadcast liberty to the masses. That may change if the two majors implode, but I doubt it. I agree with him.

[Mini-Me]

He may have some good points but IMO he is not the man to lead the charge. This was on his website as of December 2006:



Root also contributed $1000 to Lieberman's 2006 campaign: http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?26020893465

More information here:

http://knappster.blogspot.com/2008/04/those-who-try-to-rewrite-history.html

He promoted and donated to Lieberman? LIEBERMAN?!? ...and as recently as 2006? Jesus, that's bad.

Like most of us, I wasn't always libertarian, and I can totally understand that WAR wasn't either (btw, is it strange that I find his initials ominous? ;)). In fact, I've been all around the political spectrum, from neocon to a socialist civil libertarian...but I can tell you that in all my life, I have never for one second even come close to thinking Lieberman is anything but the "worst of both worlds." You can probably find someone worse than him on pretty much every individual issue, but on the balance, he could very well be the single most statist politician in Washington.

[Old Ducker]

He promoted and donated to Lieberman? LIEBERMAN?!? Jesus, that's bad. You know, like most of us, I wasn't always libertarian. In fact, I've been all around the political spectrum, from neocon to a socialist civil libertarian...and I can tell you that in all my life, I have never for one second even come close to thinking Lieberman is anything but the "worst of both worlds."

I agree, especially as it was just four years ago.

[johnrocks]

That is a pretty solid interview!

My take on Wayne Allen Root is this; there'll always a place in the libertarian movement for "popularizers" as well as intellectuals. Drew Carey, John Stossel, and Harry Browne have probably converted a lot more people to liberty than Mises, Rothbard, or Hayek have.

The problem I have with Root isn't that he's a popularizer of libertarianism, but that he often seems more concerned with popularizing himself. That always sends up a red flag in my mind, and I'm sure it does others too, because most people intuitively know when somebody's trying to sell them something.

Mary Ruwart and Michael Cloud are pretty good at mainstreaming libertarianism and distilling the ideas for a Reader's Digest audience too, but they never let their listeners' focus escape from the ideas themselves. This is an area in which I think Root could use some practice. If he got the ideas down pat and maybe spent a bit more time familiarizing himself with the egghead side of things, he'd be an absolute double-threat.

Good post, this nailed it for me.

[rich34]

I don't like W.A.R, and haven't trusted him since he spoke those harsh words against Ron Paul on foreign policy. W.A.R needs to go away or go join the neocons because that's what he is.

[Matt Collins]

I don't have a photo with him.

[heavenlyboy34]

Which is a huge problem with the LP. They make our infighting look like child's play. Essentially, the LP runs on the party rather than individuals. When I vote LP, I am voting for the party, not the candidate, which is not a way to get elected.

Why not? That's how the Big 2 get elected. It's much like corporate branding. :p

[TCE]

Why not? That's how the Big 2 get elected. It's much like corporate branding. :p

They have two parties to vote for because they think only those two are viable. The Independents vote based on the person as well. Look at Richard Blumenthal. In Texas, Dr. Paul wasn't elected because of rEVOLtion signs, he was elected because he is a family man, doctor, and an all-around good person. It is especially relevant with an up and coming party.

If you didn't care so much about politics, wouldn't you vote for someone who you knew was a great person and really branded him/herself well? I know people around here do that all the time. Decide they like a guy for his character, and don't care about the political views.